click to show more information

click to hide/show information About your Search

20121201
20121231
Search Results 0 to 11 of about 12 (some duplicates have been removed)
or to examine other possible secondary scenes, we took all those assets with us to ensure that they were right there immediately so that we could react if it was necessary. that's about all i have as far as details are concerned. i want to give you one more briefing probably just before 6:00 we'll try to get back up here for one more briefing. i'll take a couple brief questions but i must tell you there are certain things we cannot discuss at this time. i will take you right here. >> do you have anyone -- [ inaudible ]. >> there was one person that was injured that suffered an injury and did survive, yes. >> can you confirm -- >> i'm chris matthews and this is "hardball." we're watching the continuing coverage now on msnbc of the connecticut state police press conference. >> -- shooter's identity. >> not going to confirm the identity of the shooter. wl we're not prepared to do that. we have a tentative identification. we will, we will identify the shooter at an appropriate time. just for our investigatory purposes it's not appropriate to do that right now. yes? [ inaudible question ] >> again,
" and susan milligan who is contributing editor at ""u.s. news & world report."" you laugh, it's not funny. you both attended that harvard institute of policy forum. they just released, we have the audio recordings of that not filmed event. we have a real autopsy of what went on behind the scenes. during the primaries, the conventions and the general election on the romney side. let's start with the republican race for the nomination. romney's campaign manager matt rhodes was asked whether his candidate had gone too far to the right on immigration when challenged by texas governor rick perry and whether he had any regret about that. rhodes brings up the romney attacks on perry for calling social security a ponzi scheme and says he now feels that would have been enough to defeat perry. he says he didn't need to take the hard right stance on immigration. let's listen to this. here it is. >> i regret that -- i truly believe that people were shocked that we were going after governor perry in a republican primary on social security. they were critical of us at the time saying we were hitting hi
for gay marriage equality or against efforts to deny it. the issue that just eight years ago was used to deny victory to a democratic presidential candidate, john kerry, is now this country's majority opinion. well, something here has stirred but what is it in what has shifted the grunt tw-thirds against smement marriage to more than 50% for it in compassion, common sense, idea fatigue? the inability of opponents to specify a single argument against it or is it the sheer number of declarations to family, friends, co-workers and public by so many people that they are gay? is this why owe so many americans have changed their mind on marriage equality? in any case tonight a major break through in the conservative ranks. our guest clark cooper, president of the log cabin republicans, and joan walsh of salon.com. let's take a look at something that george will said this weekend and the question is has the opposition of gay marriage softened even along conservative. take a look at what mr. will said this weekend. let's watch it. >> this decision by the supreme court came 31 days after an el
for it. now the fiscal cliff talks are up in the air. nbc's mike viqueira is on capitol hill for us as we await the president. mike, what are we anticipating? >> reporter: we're anticipating the president is going to come out and talk about where negotiations stand at this point, and as far as we know, they're pretty much nowhere. we're sifting through the wreckage of what happened here in the house of representatives last night. i mean, a lot of people are looking at this and saying the president has doubled up on his victory on election day, his battlefield victory. he has routed the enemy, chased them into the woods, and what happened last night was a reckoning for the republican party. they are fractious by their own admission. john boehner cannot negotiate now. if he didn't have the votes for his plan "b" that set that income threshold at $1 million, there's no way in the world he gets anywhere close to the amount of votes he's going to need for the latest negotiating position for the president, which was up to $250,000 to $400,000 for married couples filing jointly. that's where we
still have the power when we choose to use it. the more accurate reflection of the america in the 21st century, the key question becomes in 2013 whether or not this coalition will find ways to work together to lefage that electoral power for policies on immigration reform, gun control, equal rights, economic inequality and continuing to expand the american story. so what matters most is what happens next because it's up to us to make sure that the power we loan to politicians is used for the greatest good, and it's up to us to make them earn our votes and hold them accountable when they falter. thanks to the bashir team. the "hardball" team picks things up right now. >>> deal or no deal. let's play "hardball." ♪ >>> good evening. i'm richard wolffe in for chris matthews. big numbers get thrown around at times like this in washington. as the legendary everett dirksen once said, a billion here a billion there, pretty soon you're talking real money, about you this debate isn't just about the billions here and there. for average families the payroll tax cut that started two years ago is
really wants this issue resolved or is it to his short-term political benefit for us to go over the cliff? >> aides on the hill are telling nbc news there will be no vote on any deal in the house tonight, so it does look like we'll be going over the cliff, at least temporarily. joining me now from capitol hill, nbc white house correspondent mike viqueira. what's going on right now? >> reporter: furs of all house republican aides will tell you there's nothing to vote on. in that they would be entirely correct. we've been talking about the parameters of the deal and you have correctly outlined them as far as i understand them in terms of the income levels and the alternative minimum tax, the extension of unemployment benefit insurance and odd and ends of things that are important to the business community. some text breaks that are extended every year. tax breaks left over from the stimulus. there's a lot there for people to be happy about. the trouble is there's a little bit too much for people to be unhappy about. you remember the sequester, this term we've been throwing around washington
for those of us who have been watching politics for years to see a speaker of the house fail so miserably to win support for his own measure. so that means the president is really not negotiating with anybody who can really make a deal. he can't cover any check that he'd write at the oval office. i've said all along the real issue is whether boehner can bring along his caucus for anything. he really can't and it puts everything in a tough position. but the president does end up with a more reasonable upper hand. i think jared is right. >> but the other thing i would just alert you to is, once they get through this, i think what happened last night and what's happening this week is really a bad, a bad omen for what the republicans might try to do once again on the debt ceiling in january or february. >> president obama argued tonight that both parties can agree taxes for the middle class cannot go up. let's watch what he said. >> in ten days, we face a deadline. even though democrats and republicans are arguing about whether those rates can go up for wealthest individuals, all of us agree
? will the stock market plunge a thousand points and keep on dropping? will the world money watchers see the u.s. drowning in its own dysfunction? or will obama and the dead-end opposition it faces be saved by the public's horribly low expectations of what they can do? what will prove stronger for obama and boehner? the barrels they're riding in or the power of niagra falls itself? joining me now is politico's jonathan ryan. how about an answer on that one? what's going to protect these guys more? the low expectations people have about them getting anything done or failing to do what they set out to do. they all set the deadline. they have the -- what do you call it. the stakes are clear, the payroll taxes, income taxes, you name it. they put it all together. and if they blow it, who's going to get hurt the most? >> well, i think the republicans right now are hammering themselves in the foot over and over and over again. at some point they may figure out how to stop doing that. but in the short-term doesn't look like that's happening. i think the low expectations right now are only helpful to th
people join the nra because they have to in order to use the shooting range. >> yeah, they're showing that the dues now from supporting the nra amounts to less than half of their revenue at this stage. >> yes, a lot of this money is coming from the gun industry. and as i say, a few die-hard adherents, people who do not want to compromise at all. >> richard painter, gets the last word. thank you for joining us. >> thank you very much. >>> good evening, i'm in for chris matthews. leading off tonight, fiscal cliff hanger. president obama calls on congress to act after christmas on a scaled down deal that would spare the middle class from tax hikes on the first of the year. >> we've heard plenty of people calling for new gun control laws, but very little from the national rifle association until now. in a bizarre news conference that was interrupted twice by protesters, the head of the nra. it's the same line we've heard before from the nra, but has the country's relationship with guns fundamentally changed since newtown? and what we saw last night from house republicans is yet another sy
thoughts on that issue and how that can be used in the constitution. >> that's exactly right. and there is no state interest to deny our citizens and the plaintiffs in this case the fundamental right to marriage. you know, chris, often times we get lost a bit when we're talking about these things, talking about the politics and the law, but at the end of the day there are fundamental lives at stake. when we filed this case, chris and sandy and jeff and paul had been together for ten years. now they have been together for almost 12, over 13 years. chris and sandy's twin boys were just entering high school. when this case is heard, they will be getting ready to graduate from high school. their moms deserve the same freedom to marry just as everyone else has in this country. and in this country we don't deny a certain portion of our citizens a fundamental right. we just don't. it's not american. >> isn't it true that when we had this in the court in the ninth in the appellate level, nobody came forward because nobody could come up with what you call a justification, some compell
Search Results 0 to 11 of about 12 (some duplicates have been removed)